Criteria list for assessment of methodological quality of economic evaluations: Consensus on Health Economic Criteria

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 240-245

  Evers, Silvia ^a,c   Goossens, Mariëlle ^a   De Vet, Henrica ^b   Van Tulder, Maurits ^b,d   Ament, André ^a  

^a MAASTRICHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c Maastricht University ^*  (Netherlands)

^d VU UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cost and cost analysis; Delphi technique; Evidence based medicine; Health care; Quality assurance; Review; Systematic

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; PROJECT MANAGEMENT; PUBLIC POLICY; STANDARDIZATION;

CONSENSUS ON HEALTH ECONOMIC CRITERIA (CHEC); ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS; OPERATIONALIZATION; QUALITY ASSESSMENT;

HEALTH CARE;

CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HUMAN; INTERNET; METHODOLOGY; NORMAL HUMAN; QUALITY CONTROL; QUESTIONNAIRE; REVIEW; STANDARD; STANDARDIZATION; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 18544369908     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/s0266462305050324     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Adams ME, McCall NT, Gray DT, Orza MJ, Chalmers TC. Economic analysis in randomized control trials. Med Care. 1992;30:231-243.
2. Ament AJHA, Evers SMAA, Goossens MEJB, de Vet HCW, van Tulder MW. Criteria list for conducting systematic reviews based on economic evaluation studies: CHEC. In: Donaldson C, Mugford M, Vale L, eds. Evidence-based health economics: From effectiveness to efficiency in health care. Chapt 8. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 2002:99-113.
3. Blackmore CC, Magid DJ. Methodologic evaluation of the radiology cost-effectiveness literature. Radiology. 1997;203:87-91.
4. Bradley CA, Iskedjian M, Lanctôt KL, et al. Quality assessment of economic evaluations in selected pharmacy, medical, and health economic journals. Ann Pharmacother. 1995;29:681-689.
5. Buxton MA. The Canadian experience: Step change or gradual evolution? London: Office of Health Economics; 1997.
6. Clemens K, Townsend R, Luscombe F, et al. Methodological and conduct principles for pharmacoeconomic research. Pharmacoeconomics. 1995;8:169-174.
7. Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics of the McMaster University Health Science Centre. How to read clinical journals: VII. To understand an economic evaluation (part B). Can Med Assoc J. 1984;130:1542-1549.
8. Detsky AS. Guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products. A draft document for Ontario and Canada. Pharmacoeconomics. 1993;3:354-361.
9. Drummond M, Brandt A, Luce B, Rovira J. Standardizing methodologies for economic evaluation in health care. Intl J Technol Assess Health Care. 1993;9:26-36.
10. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ economic evaluation working party. BMJ. 1996;313:275-283.
11. Drummond MF, O'Brien BJ, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1997.
12. Drummond MF, Richardson WS, O'Brien BJ, Levine M, Heyland D. User's guides to the medical literature. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. JAMA. 1997;277:1552-1556.
13. Eisenberg JM. Clinical economics. A guide tot economic analysis of clinical practices. JAMA. 1989;262:2879-2886.
14. Evers SMAA, van Wijk AS, Ament AJHA. Economic evaluations of mental health care interventions. A review. Maastricht: Department of Health Economics; 1994:39.
15. Ganiats TG, Wong AF. Evaluation of cost-effectiveness research. A survey of recent publications. Fam Med. 1991;23:457-461.
16. Gerard K. Cost-utility in practice: A policy maker's guide to the state of the art. Health Policy. 1992;21:249-279.
17. Gibson GA. Use of the guidelines to evaluate and interpret pharmacoeconomic literature. Pharmacoeconomics and outcomes. Kansas City, MO: American College of Clinical Pharmacy; 1996:325-364.
18. Gold MR, Russell LB, Siegel JE, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1996.
19. Haycox A, Drummond M, Walley T. Pharmacoeconomics: Integrating economic evaluation into clinical trials. Br J Pharmacol. 1997;43:559-562.
20. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary. Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:1-12.
21. Lee JT, Sanchez LA. Interpretation of "cost-effective" and soundness of economic evaluations in the pharmacy literature. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1991;48:2622-2627.
22. Mason J, Drummond M. Reporting guidelines for economic studies. Health Econ. 1995;4:85-94.
23. Moher D, Jadad AR, Nichol G, et al. Assessing the quality of randomised controlled trials: An annotated bibliography of scales and checklists. Control Clin Trials. 1995;16:62-73.
24. Sacristán JA, Soto J, Galende I. Evaluation of pharmacoeconomic studies: Utilization of a checklist. Ann Pharmacother. 1993;27:1126-1133.
25. Sanchez LA. Evaluating the quality of published pharmacoeconomic evaluations. Hosp Pharm. 1995;30:146-148.
26. Sanchez LA. Applied pharmacoeconomics: Evaluation and use of pharmacoeconomic data from the literature. Am J Health-System Pharm. 1999;56:1630-1638.
27. Soto J. Health economic evaluations using decision analytic modelling: Principles and practices-utilization of a checklist to their development and appraisal. Intl J Technol Assess Health Care. 2002;18:94-111.
28. Task Force on Principles for Economic analysis of health care technology, Economic analysis of health care technology. A report on principles. Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:61-70.
29. Udvarhelyi S, Colditz GA, Rai A, Epstein AM. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analysis in the medical literature. Ann Intern Med. 1992;116:238-244.
30. Verhagen AP, Vet de HCW, de Bie RA, et al. The Delphi List: A criteria for a list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developments by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:1235-1241.